Egalitarian rhetoric, once largely confined to revolutionary movements, such as French Jacobins & Marxist Communists, now appears accepted by many in the political & social mainstream. Thus, there is scarcely a ripple among affluent viewers when major "Liberal" broadcast media air programs discussing the "need" & methods to "narrow a gap between the rich & poor," despite the unspoken, yet obvious, implications. Thus a former American President, who claimed to be a "Compassionate Conservative," voiced a similar objective, with scarce notice in a generally hostile media, which had no problem in mislabeling him & the like-minded, as "right wing."

The true implications of such a goal are not, of course, the claimed altruistic pursuit of "social justice" or a fairer allocation of resources. They are the traditional Socialist & Communist mantra that those who succeed do so, in large measure, by exploiting those who fail--an ongoing slander, not only against the affluent of this generation, but against much that is noble in human history. The Leftist mantra depends not upon individual cases, where someone may indeed have taken unfair advantage of another--a situation subject to case by case judicial resolution--but upon a presumption that all classes of persons possess basically similar aptitudes for success.

I have held back from posting a thread on the July, 2013 Feature at Truth Based Logic, because it is a rewrite of an article originally written in 2005. But since it deals in some detail with the compulsion that underlies most Socialist & Communist, as well as general American Leftist fervor to change the rest of us--and thus is relevant to most of the really critical current political & social issues, I have gone ahead.

Thanks for checking it out. While I may sometimes sound like a broken record, focusing on the irrational bases for most Leftwing thought, I have come to my conclusions after years of dissecting their arguments.

For one thing, they are never grounded on verifiable premises--i.e., they take a snap shot of a current condition, and then rush to a conclusion as to the cause, which usually involves demonizing someone with no evidence to support the demonization--only circular reasoning that suggests that to succeed, one has to wrong someone else.

For an example, the Industrial Revolution was the dawn of tremendous opportunity for surplus labor that was no longer needed on the farms of England & Scotland; but all the Left can focus on is that the working conditions at the start were far from ideal. Think about it. It was a prototype of the vicious attribution of blame for all sorts of things that have followed. And, of course, also presupposes that people are interchangeable.

I should further note, that the idea that people are somehow interchangeable lies at the heart of the Leftist position on immigration; redistribution of wealth; softness on crime control; scape-goating the successful; the Obama effort to reengineer housing patterns, putting young women in combat units, and just about every other seemingly insane abuse of political power, that we have to try to contend with today.

Individual effort has always been anathema to the left, as is differing degrees of intelligence.

Yes. Absolutely. They also fail to recognize, not only differing degrees of intelligence, but differing mental aptitudes; which has the clear effect of actually retarding the opportunities for realization by some of the very groups they claim to be trying to help! Only scoundrels & demagogues benefit from what is going on.

” They also fail to recognize, not only differing degrees of intelligence, but differing mental aptitudes; which has the clear effect of actually retarding the opportunities for realization by some of the very groups they claim to be trying to help!”

Well, the left always claims to want to help these people, but if you scratch the scab, they merely want to control these people, not help them. This never varies, regardless of the topic of discussion.

I read the following quote here this morning - it made so much sense to me. I’m not sure it applies exactly to the ‘field’ you’re analyzing, but I thought it was a good template for liberal (non)thought.

Socialism, like the ancient ideas from which it springs, confuses the distinction between government and society. As a result of this, every time we object to a thing being done by government, the socialists conclude that we object to its being done at all. We disapprove of state education. Then the socialists say that we are opposed to any education. We object to a state religion. Then the socialists say that we want no religion at all. We object to a state-enforced equality. Then they say that we are against equality. And so on, and so on. It is as if the socialists were to accuse us of not wanting persons to eat because we do not want the state to raise grain. ~ Frédéric Bastiat, The Law

8
posted on 07/31/2013 3:55:41 PM PDT
by spankalib
("I freed a thousand slaves. I could have freed a thousand more if only they knew they were slaves.")

Thank you for the Bastiat quote. He is actually addressing the same "field," but from a slightly different perspective.

One of the first things I realized, when I first began my four years at a very, very "Liberal" (in the modern sense) college, was that Leftist thought is never grounded on reality. As Kipling put it, it is windborne & cloudborne. They start with their biases & wishlists, or outright compulsions, and then seek to verbally rationalize them.

The pretense that drives collectivist/egalitarian politics, educational theories, social agitations, etc., impacts virtually every issue of particular interest to American Conservatives. It supplies the rationale for the grievance industry; for schemes to build new world orders; for the demonization of those who achieve & succeed; for coveting the fruits of their success; and for the sort of offensive terminology that impugns the motives of normal people, who simply want to live as their forebears in a free society.

Once you see the pattern of denial--that is the denial of reality--that fuels the Leftist efforts in virtually every field, you will begin to perceive how to better attack them on a wide panoply of fronts.

Here is another quote from the article, which should indicate the thrust of what we then develop:

That behind Egalitarian argument is compulsion, not reason, should be clear, both from the almost hysterical cant of its adherents and from a persistent use of far-fetched arguments, whose premises have been refuted over & over again, down through the generations. It should also be clear from the fact that the dogmatic conclusions help no one. To the contrary, the ongoing war on reality retards more legitimate efforts to improve any part of the human condition.

Again, Egalitarianism is not compassion driven. It is compulsion driven in much the same sense as the mob that cheered every time a young girl, whose only crime was to have been born into a family that had played an illustrious part in French history, was beheaded before the Paris City Hall during the "Reign of Terror." We saw its like repeated in the waves of purposeful savagery, unleashed in Russia by the Bolshevik Revolution. Yet again, among the massed, uniformed, automatons cheering in staccato unison in the stands at Nuremberg, as the Fuehrer ranted about the glories of a new "Classless, Casteless" Germany, acting with one "Will," under one Leader.

Nor is there anything idealistic about an effort to reduce the rich & varied tapestry, the quite diverse tribes & nations of the earth, to the culture of some form of insect, where all but the Queen live uniform, completely structured lives, with no expectation of individual character or identity--no possibility of ever rising above the masses.

Well, the left always claims to want to help these people, but if you scratch the scab, they merely want to control these people, not help them. This never varies, regardless of the topic of discussion.

The inherent fallacy of the collectivist egalitarian is in irreconcilable conflict with actually helping anyone at a disadvantage. The dogma prevents the development of anything unique to the individual. Exceptionalism of any type, is in conflict with the mantra. The very division of labor that has made possible almost all material human progress since the most primitive, is itself something they have a difficult time accepting--hence the endless appeals to jealousy & envy--to demanding progress rather than working for it, by developing whatever talents one has.

” The very division of labor that has made possible almost all material human progress since the most primitive, is itself something they have a difficult time accepting—hence the endless appeals to jealousy & envy—to demanding progress rather than working for it”

The Obama administration in a nutshell.The jealousy & envy eventually slips into hatred.

” Why is all this important today? Because President Obama has once again embraced the Jacobin, Marxist, Bolshevik & Nazi, Blame & Envy Cocktail. In his campaign addresses, he blames identified economic classes or economic interest groups for America’s problems; always playing upon envy & resentment; ever appealing to the covetousness of those most susceptible to the demagogues’ cocktail. Will it all end badly? Do we have a Jacobin, Marxist, Communist or Nazi era in our future?

Mankind has seen this game before. No, the Marxist view of historic inevitability is philosophically idiotic. But the formula has worked to create horror in other nations. Already the vicious attempts by Administration demagogues, to falsely blame traditional American social institutions for the problems of racial minorities, is inciting sporadic acts of violence—with multiplying threats of more to come. This is how it starts. In the Jacobin, Bolshevik & Nazi examples, we know the consequences. They are never limited to the scapegoats. “

Thank you. I have been fighting the Leftist attack on civilization, reality & the American future, since I matriculated at a Left leaning college in the 1950s.

And in all that time, I have encountered very, very few, on the Left, who showed any comprehension of dynamic analysis. They almost all, see a very selective reality--and that only from a still-life perspective. It is like they are watching a slide show, with each shot taken from a very carefully selected perspective, which shows only those things which suit their preconceived purpose.

Interesting! The new President of the Republican/Libertarian Club--truly a breath of fresh air on the campus--is in the Conservatory, also. I, of course, was in the Liberal Arts College, and never found anyone, student or faculty, who could handle the arguments I used even then They really were--and except for the Conservative fragment & those who are simply trying to get a degree, are--cloud-borne.

Michelle Malkin is also an Oberlin grad, who resisted the indoctrination.

If your brother is interested in the present developments, from our perspective, at Oberlin, send me his email, privately.

You wont love it if they pull it off--that is, the world order that they seek.

Egalitarianism stifles every thing that is decent; every thing that offers uplift; every thing that intrigues or fascinates the imagination; everything that inspires decent endeavor; that promotes our better natures. (For a graphic example, look at what cultish Feminism's war on femininity has done to chivalry!)

Yes. Michelle shows more mettle than a great many of our male Conservative writers, who walk on eggs—as it were—over certain issues. You cannot let the Left create artificial taboos, and expect to turn the tide. It is ever the case that the issues on which they are most vulnerable are the ones on which they hiss the loudest. (”Hiss,” since Eve listened to the original Obama type demagogue, is often the best operative verb for the articulation of Leftist thought. Although Obama, like Hitler, personally prefers the iteration of the declaimed slogan.)

” Yes. Michelle shows more mettle than a great many of our male Conservative writers, who walk on eggsas it wereover certain issues. You cannot let the Left create artificial taboos, and expect to turn the tide.”

Sadly, there are only a handful of conservative writers who have enough nerve to actually fight for an issue, or cause. Malkin is one of them.

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.